|
|
|
|
|
|
by theVirginian
4136 days ago
|
|
|
Perhaps, but there certainly are some incidents which are ambiguous. I fear that by taking that mindset we will create an environment where people have more incentive to not speak to or interact with women because they might get in trouble for an action that was either careless or consciously intended not to be sexist but gets twisted around and made to look that way. I certainly think that saying something like "you are less capable because you are a woman" is sexist but saying something like "your dress is fun" does not unambiguously imply that it was a sexual advance. Why can't it just be a nice unthreatening comment? |
|
|
This is how I feel about most tech gatherings now, even online discussions (I'm actually a bit nervous about this comment). Any interaction I have with a woman in tech, or any discussion about women in tech that I might participate in, has the potential for career-threatening blowback. So far I've been following the War Games strategy: "The only way to win, is not to play." But that doesn't feel great either, because now I'm consciously avoiding people who otherwise might have been great to have a conversation with.
The worst part is, I didn't have that problem until the whole women in tech thing was dragged into the light. I'm not saying that shouldn't have happened: it's obvious by now that there are problems that need solving. There have been consequences, however, of which I'm not sure the more vocal members of this movement are cognizant.